Crunch, Grit, and Stick Theory

This short post builds on three prior posts that I’m going to summarize as best as I can so you don’t have to read them:

  1. In “Congas 101,” I laid the foundation for Crunch, Grit, and Stick Theory. Crunchy games focus on tactical combat. Gritty games focus on exploration and lateral thinking. Sticky games focus on keeping the story interesting. (This is basically the same as Brad Kerr’s “door D&D, fight D&D, and sticky fingers D&D,” but it’s more flexible: a game might be “sticky crunch” or “crunchy grit.”)
  2. In “The Four Channels of Creative Constraints on RPGs,” I defined four kinds of constraints that shape the way we play RPGs, three of which are relevant here: Rules (what rules are you following?), Content (what have you prepared in advance?), and Principles (what advice does the GM follow when running the game?).
  3. In “Dead Theory Necromancy,” I analyzed different styles of play using the threefold model, which is a tool that GMs can use to analyze the calls they make during their games. Do you tend to make calls according to Gamism (what makes a better challenge?), Dramatism (what makes a better story?), or Simulationism (what would be most likely to happen?).

In this post I’m going to analyze Crunch, Grit, and Stick according to the kinds of Rules, Content, and Principles associated with each. The Principles category will give me an opportunity to comment further on Gamism, Dramatism, and Simulationism.

CRUNCH

  1. Rules: Crunch is associated with large rulebooks that concern themselves with detailed combat procedures and a wide variety of options to differentiate characters in combat.
  2. Content: Crunchy prep tends to focus on a linear or branching series of scenes that alternate between combat and non-combat challenges. In-fiction time pressure (we have to save the town before it’s too late!) is often used to keep PCs on track.
  3. Principles: Crunch is anti-simulationism. Crunch encourages GMs to change prep on the fly or fudge dice rolls to re-balance combat encounters (gamism) or improve the story (dramatism).

GRIT

  1. Rules: Grit is increasingly associated with light rulebooks that provide a simple framework for play and lots of possible starting characters with different means of solving problems.
  2. Content: Gritty prep tends to focus on interesting fictional scenarios and non-linear “crawls” (dungeoncrawls, hexcrawls, pointcrawls, etc.). Factions start the game in tense stalemates, waiting around for the PCs to tip the balance one way or the other.
  3. Principles: Grit is anti-dramatism. Grit forbids GMs from changing prep on the fly or fudging dice rolls. The GM is meant to embody a “neutral arbiter” who only rules based on what would happen (simulationism) or, when in doubt, what would make a more satisfying challenge (gamism).

STICK

  1. Rules: Stick is associated with mechanics designed to complicate the story (conflict resolution in PbtA, tokens in BoB, Stress and Vices in BitD, etc.).
  2. Content: Stick tends to try to avoid prep or otherwise make prep something everyone can participate in at the table during or prior to the game.
  3. Principles: Stick is anti-gamism. There’s little to no consideration in sticky games for challenging the players as opposed to the player characters. The GM and/or the group as a whole make calls for dramatic interest (dramatism) and play to find out what happens (simulationism).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ruins & Rogues vs. Maze Rats

Image
So after years of trying to design my perfect game, I finally have it in my hands... And what do you know, it turns out it's very similar to Maze Rats . Hell, its name is even made up of synonyms for "Maze" and "Rats." I didn't consciously set out to write a Maze Rats hack. This is just where I ended up. But why did I end up here, and if what I wanted was so similar to Maze Rats, why did I make a new game instead of just playing Maze Rats? I don't see many people talking about the actual rules of Maze Rats, I mostly see them talking about the tables, so this should be an interesting exercise. Similarities Before we analyze differences, let's take a look at what these games have in common. Both games use "control-panel" layout and fit their core rules on a two-page spread. Both games only use six-sided dice. Both games have quick character creation based on rolling PCs randomly. Both games use side initiative: on your side's turn, you ca...
Read more

LORE DUMP: On the Origin of Gods, Monsters, Magic, and More

Image
The following post is about lore I'm thinking of using for my next campaign world. If you think you'd like to play in a game of mine some day, perhaps you'd rather discover it in-game alongside your character, if it even comes up at all. (Personally, I don't think it's much of a spoiler, and a little out-of-character knowledge might give you context for how your character would understand the world.) I. Sapient species produce souls. This phenomenon is poorly understood, but what is known is that, unless the soul's host experienced some serious trauma , the soul sinks to the center of the planet and joins a mass of soul-stuff called the World Will. A select few, called "prophets," are born with the ability to encounter aspects of the World Will through their dreams. Through such encounters, the prophets come to categorize, personify, and interact with such aspects, which they conceive of as "gods" or "spirits." (In truth, the manifo...
Read more

Dead Theory Necromancy

Image
I. Introduction GNS theory is dead, but this post on the history of the Forge contains an interesting tidbit: As originally conceived, the rec.games.frp.advocacy threefold was based on the traditional RPG division of responsibilities between players and referees, and was proposed as a means of examining specific decisions on the part of a referee. It recognised three distinct criteria which a referee could use to make a call one way or another: Gamism , whereby the referee makes the call which they consider makes for the best gaming challenge for the players, Dramatism , whereby the referee makes the call which they consider makes for the best dramatic story, and Simulationism , whereby the referee tries to avoid metaplot considerations and come up with the ruling which makes logical sense based on the IC assumptions of the game world. An important point of the original model is that it assumed that people are not, by and large, consistent on this point; sometimes they’d favour syste...
Read more